Sub-Theme 1: Rethinking Quality Assurance For Flexibility And Innovation

The rapid evolution of higher education learning modalities—driven by globalization, digital transformation, and changing student expectations—necessitates a fundamental reconfiguration of traditional quality assurance (QA) frameworks. Conventional QA systems, historically designed to assess face-to-face, time-bound, and program-based instruction, are increasingly insufficient for evaluating the emerging paradigms of hybrid, online, flexible, and modular learning (Sursock, 2015; Harvey & Williams, 2010).

This sub-theme critically explores how QA frameworks can be reimagined to accommodate adaptive learning models that support personalisation, mobility, and lifelong learning. The rise of micro-credentials, short courses, and stackable learning pathways presents opportunities and challenges for QA agencies and higher education institutions. Key concerns include validating learning outcomes, credit recognition, coherence across delivery formats, and ensuring parity of esteem with traditional qualifications (Brown, 2021).

Moreover, integrating learning analytics and real- time data dashboards in QA processes allow institutions to move beyond episodic evaluation toward continuous quality enhancement.

This shift supports a more agile, evidence-based approach to curriculum development, assessment, and student support (Ifenthaler & Yau, 2020).

Equally important is aligning QA processes with innovative pedagogical practices, such as competency-based education,   flipped classrooms, and inquiry-driven learning, which require rethinking the standards used to evaluate teaching effectiveness, student engagement, and graduate outcomes.

“Integrating learning analytics and real-time data dashboards in QA processes.”

Key focus areas include:

 Reconceptualising QA for modular and micro-credential programmes, ensuring credibility, transferability, and coherence within national qualifications frameworks.

 Embedding data-informed decision- making into institutional QA cycles to support predictive interventions and real-time improvements.

 Aligning QA mechanisms with emerging pedagogies and delivery models, ensuring they remain relevant, inclusive, and responsive to learner needs.

This sub-theme invites scholarly contributions, case studies, and policy perspectives that examine how QA systems can become more flexible, forward-looking, and innovation- enabling while maintaining academic integrity and accountability.

Sub-Theme 2: Technology-Enhanced Learning And Digital Transformation

The accelerated integration of digital technologies into higher education—particularly following the disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic—has reshaped the landscape of teaching, learning, and quality assurance. Emerging tools such as Artificial Intelligence (AI), learning analytics, virtual and augmented reality (VR/AR), and adaptive learning systems are not only transforming pedagogical approaches but also prompting a re-evaluation of quality standards and educational outcomes (Zawacki-Richter et al., 2019; Bond et al., 2020).

This sub-theme critically engages with the opportunities and challenges posed by technology- enhanced learning (TEL) in the context of quality assurance. It invites contributions that explore how digital transformation enables personalized, flexible, and data-driven learning experiences, while raising complex questions about the ethical use of technology, data governance, and digital equity (Eynon, 2013; Williamson & Piattoeva, 2021).

Key areas of focus include:

 Quality and Ethics of AI-Driven Tools: Examination of how AI is used to support or automate teaching and assessment practices, with particular attention to issues of transparency, algorithmic bias, and academic integrity. Authors are encouraged to discuss regulatory and ethical frameworks for the responsible use of AI in higher education (Luckin, 2017; Holmes et al., 2021).

 Building Digital Literacy and Capacity: Consider institutional strategies for equipping

educators and students with the digital competencies necessary for meaningful engagement with TEL environments. This includes developing digital pedagogical skills, critical digital literacies, and adaptive mindsets among academic staff and learners (Beetham & Sharpe, 2013).

 Assessing Learning in Digital Contexts: Exploration of innovative approaches to

monitoring and evaluating learning outcomes within digitally mediated settings. Submissions may address the role of learning analytics in quality assurance, student feedback mechanisms in online environments, and methodologies for assessing engagement and performance in blended and remote learning contexts (Siemens & Long, 2011; Ferguson, 2012).

This sub-theme recognizes that while TEL holds transformative potential, its effective integration into quality assurance frameworks requires deliberate, inclusive, and contextually sensitive approaches that foreground educational purpose, equity, and academic rigour.

Sub-Theme 3: Student Engagement, Inclusion, And Holistic Support

Promoting meaningful student engagement and equitable academic participation is both a pedagogical imperative and a core component of quality assurance in increasingly diverse and complex higher education systems (Kahu, 2013; Zepke, 2018). This sub-theme critically examines how higher education institutions (HEIs) can create inclusive and adaptive learning environments that recognise students’ varied socio-economic, cultural, and academic backgrounds.

“Robust support ecosystem enhances retention and graduation rates and contributes to developing well-rounded, resilient graduates equipped to thrive in complex, global contexts.”

Central to this discussion is adopting inclusive pedagogical frameworks, such as Universal Design for Learning (UDL), which advocate for flexible curricula, varied assessment methods, and learner-centered teaching strategies (CAST, 2018; Moriña, 2017). These approaches are essential to addressing systemic barriers that hinder full participation and promoting differentiated instruction that supports all students, particularly those from historically marginalised groups

Additionally, the sub-theme explores how quality assurance systems can incorporate student well-being, voice, and agency measures as critical indicators of institutional effectiveness. Traditional metrics of performance and satisfaction are increasingly being supplemented by data on emotional engagement, psychological safety, and the co-creation of learning experiences (Tinto, 2012; Bovill, Cook-Sather, & Felten, 2011). Embedding these qualitative dimensions into QA frameworks ensures a more holistic and student-responsive evaluation of teaching and learning environments.

Finally, a key focus is on providing integrated student support services, including academic advising, mental health care, career guidance, and financial aid which function as enablers of academic success and personal development (Thomas, 2020). A robust support ecosystem enhances retention and graduation rates and contributes to developing well-rounded, resilient graduates equipped to thrive in complex, global contexts.

This sub-theme invites theoretical and empirical contributions investigating best practices, policy innovations, and institutional models that effectively align student support and engagement strategies with comprehensive quality assurance.

Sub-Theme 4: Leadership, Policy, And Institutional Readiness For Change

Creating adaptive learning environments requires not only pedagogical and technological transformation but also strategic leadership, responsive policy frameworks, and institutional agility. This sub-theme critically examines the governance structures and systemic conditions necessary for higher education institutions (HEIs) to effectively adapt to evolving educational demands.

At the heart of this sub-theme is the recognition that leadership plays a pivotal role in driving innovation, fostering a culture of quality, and sustaining change. Adaptive leadership approaches—characterized by collaboration, inclusivity, and responsiveness—are increasingly essential as institutions navigate complex shifts in teaching modalities, learner expectations, and global benchmarks for quality (Fullan, 2001; Blackmore, 2009). Key areas of exploration include institutional leadership models that support transformational change, strategic planning for innovation in learning environments, and the integration of quality assurance mechanisms into governance structures.

Moreover, enabling policy environments are critical for institutional innovation. National and regional policy frameworks must evolve to support diverse modes of learning, promote institutional autonomy, and encourage experimentation with new quality assurance (QA) models (Hénard & Roseveare, 2012). Discussions under this sub-theme will explore how regulatory frameworks can balance accountability with innovation, and how performance-based funding and outcome-driven accreditation are reshaping QA landscapes.

Finally, this sub-theme invites critical engagement with regional and global collaborations aimed at harmonizing QA standards, particularly in the context of cross-border education, international partnerships, and virtual mobility. The role of regional QA networks, such as the African Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance (ASG-QA) and the European Standards and Guidelines (ESG), will be considered as mechanisms for mutual recognition and shared accountability (ENQA, 2015).

Key focus areas include:

 Leadership and change management strategies that facilitate the creation of adaptive, student-centered institutions.

 Policy innovations that enable flexibility, institutional autonomy, and QA transformation.  Institutional self-assessment tools and readiness indicators for adaptive learning.

 Regional and international cooperation on quality assurance frameworks and mutual recognition mechanisms.

This sub-theme calls for contributions that critically assess how leadership, policy, and governance can drive quality and sustainability in rapidly evolving learning environments.